Saw this comment on the commie side of TikTok. My gut tells me this is ultraleft bs, but perhaps my fellow hexbears can educate me on this discussion which I’m sure is not new.

I don’t see how a poor American on food stamps is responsible, even though a systematic analysis reveals that international superexploitation is a thing.

The American proletariat can and should organize in any case. I don’t see how Americans can build any sort of socialist movement if any organization at all is accused of being hypocritical.

  • quarrk [he/him]
    hexagon
    ·
    edit-2
    3 days ago

    I haven’t read that Cope book (unfortunate name lol) but seems kinda dubious to say that all western workers are labor aristocratic.

    Is the logic that the average US daily wage is higher than the value of the goods produced during the working day, therefore workers are being overpaid for their labor power?

    The problem I have is that in Marx, the value of labor-power is flexible, because politically determined. Its value is the value of the goods required for its reproduction, at a certain standard of living. And because it costs more to live in countries like the US, the value of labor power for US workers really is higher.

    I would of course agree that it isn’t fair that this is the case, but the reason things are “cheap” in peripheral countries is in large part because of US fuckery which relatively weakens their currencies. This weakening of currencies doesn’t suddenly convert the entire US proletariat into labor aristocrats… IMO. It really feels nonsensical to look at it this way when so many US workers are in poverty.

    • ComradeRat [he/him, they/them]
      ·
      3 days ago

      Costs of living are actually lower in terms of percentage of wage in the imperial core, as I said in original comment (as as Cope shows with numbers both for wages, costs of necessities and hours of labour to earn necessities)

      Cope has read all three vols of capital and cites and engages with them extensively fwiw. He is aware of Marxs arguements and in fact cites Marx extensively to support his arguments. I would suggest reading the Cope book bc, tbh, you could probably follow the maths better than I could. He takes all your points into account and directly refutes them (some of them even in the two prefaces). It felt like reading Marx, in terms of his thoroughness.